4 ms·

Conversely, I am glad I live in a universe where professional crew members stick to the flight plan and don't go glory hunting at the first opportunity. AFAIK,

Conversely, I am glad I live in a universe where professional crew members stick to the flight plan and don't go glory hunting at the first opportunity. AFAIK, "Snoopy" was too heavy to land and take off anyhow, the astronauts didn't have EVA capable suits, and there wasn't enough oxygen to replenish the LM cabin should they have opened the hatch to perform EVA. Any ride to the surface would have been suicidal folly, regardless of fuel quantity.

dmurray 7y ago
I thought Apollo 10 was meant to be a dry run for Apollo 11, so it was set up identically. Why would they have differed on something so important as the weight of the LM?
- cyberferret 7y ago
  Almost every LM on every mission was completely different. I don't believe any two were the same. Each mission had different requirements that necessitated major redesigns to the LM. For instance, the later missions that used the Lunar Rover had significantly bigger and heavier LMs to accommodate the vehicle.
  - rbanffy 7y ago
    From a cursory look, they all look the same. I remember the LM went through lots of iterations before it was practical (and it's entirely possible Snoopy was too heavy) but it's hard to see too many differences between the versions that actually flew. What changed seemed to be landing weight and life support for the crew (later versions allowed multiple EVAs and remained landed much longer than Eagle). Still, no EVA suits is one thing, but having no operable ascent engine is really terrible because, if something goes wrong with the descent engine (which is the thing being exercised here) the crew has no backup whatsoever in case they have no option but landing (maybe a guidance issue that requires the LM to stop - in general emergency landings in places with no breathable atmosphere are a mistake).

4 ms·

Conversely, I am glad I live in a universe where professional crew members stick to the flight plan and don't go glory hunting at the first opportunity. AFAIK,

by cyberferret 7y ago

dmurray 7y ago
I thought Apollo 10 was meant to be a dry run for Apollo 11, so it was set up identically. Why would they have differed on something so important as the weight of the LM?
- cyberferret 7y ago
  Almost every LM on every mission was completely different. I don't believe any two were the same. Each mission had different requirements that necessitated major redesigns to the LM. For instance, the later missions that used the Lunar Rover had significantly bigger and heavier LMs to accommodate the vehicle.
  - rbanffy 7y ago
    From a cursory look, they all look the same. I remember the LM went through lots of iterations before it was practical (and it's entirely possible Snoopy was too heavy) but it's hard to see too many differences between the versions that actually flew. What changed seemed to be landing weight and life support for the crew (later versions allowed multiple EVAs and remained landed much longer than Eagle). Still, no EVA suits is one thing, but having no operable ascent engine is really terrible because, if something goes wrong with the descent engine (which is the thing being exercised here) the crew has no backup whatsoever in case they have no option but landing (maybe a guidance issue that requires the LM to stop - in general emergency landings in places with no breathable atmosphere are a mistake).